Busting the Budget with Nuclear Weapons Spending

December 16, 2014 | Edited by Will Saetren

Nuclear money pit - “Embarking on a new generation of nuclear weapons would certainly alarm allies as much as potential enemies. And it would undo much of the hard work done to further global cooperation on nonproliferation,” write the editors of The Economist on plans to produce more plutonium pits. “America has all the nuclear triggers it requires, and then some.”

--Nuclear deterrence “begins to fail when an over-abundance of bomb-making bits at home sends shivers through the country’s own citizenry… Right now, the NNSA’s biggest task ought to be not upgrading its plutonium production lines, but downgrading the huge surplus supply of weapons-grade plutonium.” Read the full story here. http://econ.st/1zoc4wb

Budget buster - The Ohio-class submarine replacement program may cost 17 percent more than the Navy’s estimate, according to the Congressional Budget Office analysis of the Fiscal Year 2015 Shipbuilding Plan. CBO’s $92 billion price tag would be an even bigger threat to conventional ship plans and more incentive for the Navy to try to sneak the subs out of their budget. Read the full analysis here. http://1.usa.gov/1GqFxZv

Tweet - @nukes_of_hazard: Congrats to Frank Rose! After 500+ days, finally confirmed as new Asst. Secretary for Verification & Compliance! pic.twitter.com/6TPQdB6V42

Laureates against nukes - From the 2014 Summit of Nobel Peace Laureates final declaration, “If we fail to prevent nuclear war, all of our other efforts to secure peace and justice will be for naught.... We need to stigmatize, prohibit and eliminate nuclear weapons.” Full declaration here. http://bit.ly/1swzWsk

Nukes in Crimea? - Russia reserves the right to deploy nuclear weapons in Crimea, a top Russian official said Monday. “Crimea was not a non-nuclear zone in an international law sense but was part of Ukraine, a state which doesn't possess nuclear arms,” said Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov. “Now Crimea has become part of a state which possesses such weapons in accordance with the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty.” Sergei Loiko has the full story for the Los Angeles Times. http://lat.ms/1IVaDKU

Breakout myth - “The fixation on breakout is badly misplaced; it simply does not matter,” writes Paul Pillar for The National Interest. “The difference between, say, six months and a year is meaningless when any conceivable response, including military attack as well as enactment of the most debilitating possible sanctions, could be accomplished within a couple of weeks.”

--“It would be bad enough if the saboteurs get their way… It would be just as tragic if the diplomatic process fails because even those with honest and good intentions regarding an agreement stick to the notion that the United States does not have to show more flexibility to get an agreement.” Read the full column here. http://bit.ly/1vVH81p

Tweet - @Lara_APN: Iran talks fun from Berim.org: How much do you know about the Iran negotiations? Take the quiz! http://bit.ly/1GLWdsw

Good atmosphere - Iran said on Tuesday that bilateral nuclear talks with the U.S. were proceeding in “a good atmosphere” despite lingering gaps over key issues. Reuters reports that “U.S. and Iranian diplomats began a two-day meeting in Geneva on Monday to pave the way for resuming broader negotiations involving Iran and six world powers there on Wednesday.” Full story here. http://reut.rs/1zmq0bb

A new hope - With two years left in office, President Obama still has time to shape his legacy, writes Stephen Young for All things Nuclear. There are many areas that were defined as central at the onset of his presidency which remain untouched, but none more so than nuclear weapons. Full piece here. http://bit.ly/1AC12m9

Quick Hits:

--“UK election threat to nuclear deterrent,” by Kiran Stacey for the Financial Times. http://on.ft.com/1yYSk4y

--“Critics attack Army plan to leave toxic mess,” by Charlie White for The Courier Journal. http://cin.ci/1390SHY

--“New Los Alamos lab fellows named,” by Mark Oswald of the Albuquerque Journal. http://bit.ly/16pE0pV

--“Interview: Paul Bracken on American nuclear forces in the 21st century,” with Dan Drollette Jr. for The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists. http://bit.ly/133v3k9

Events:

--“U.S. Nuclear Arms Control Policy: A Talk with Under Secretary of State Rose Gottemoeller,” featuring Rose Gottemoeller and Amb. Steven Pifer. From 10:00 AM - 11:30 AM, December 17 at the Brookings Institution. Located 1775 Massachusetts Avenue, N.W. in the Falk Auditorium. RSVP online.

--“Breaking the Stalemate in U.S.-South Korea Nuclear Cooperation Negotiations,” featuring Scott Snyder. From Noon-1:30 PM on December 17 at the Global America Business Institute. Located at 1001 Connecticut Ave., NW, Suite 435, Washington. RSVP to Christina Sookyung Jung by email at csjung@thegabi.com.

--“Preventing a Nuclear-Armed Iran through Diplomacy,” webinar by Womens Action for New Directions, featuring Kelsey Davenport of ACA and Jamal Abdi of NIAC. Wednesday January 7 at 2:00 PM. Register here.

Dessert:

Nuclear drones - “Long before the CIA began sending missile-armed drones to attack Taliban and Al Qaeda operatives in Afghanistan, U.S. Air Force officials mulled sending robotic aircraft against the Soviet Union. Carrying nuclear bombs. Adam Rownsley of War Is Boring has the story. http://bit.ly/1GqGzEM